By using this site, you agree to our updated Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Manage your Cookies Settings.
440,092 Members | 1,650 Online
Bytes IT Community
+ Ask a Question
Need help? Post your question and get tips & solutions from a community of 440,092 IT Pros & Developers. It's quick & easy.

need some help in serving static files inside a wsgi apps

P: n/a
Hi,

Until now, I was running my own static site with Python, but I'm in
need of dynamism.

After reading some cgi tutorials, I saw Joe Gregorio's old article
"Why so many Python web frameworks?" about wsgi apps [http://
bitworking.org/news/Why_so_many_Python_web_frameworks] and have a
question about it. The code he gave works like a charm (I had to make
a little change because SQLAlchemy has changed since), but how the
hell can I serve static files (css, js, images, etc.) within an wsgi
app, ie inside a '/static' directory ?!

Sorry if my question is a stupid one, but I cannot find an easy way to
do this. Each tutorial I'm reading out there does not talk about them
at all. All of my python books didn't mention wsgi either.

I know I could use web.py, web2py, Cherrypy, Django, Pylons, etc. but
I'm trying to understand basics of web dev. from their roots.

thanks in advance for any advice ,

Kib.
Jun 27 '08 #1
Share this Question
Share on Google+
9 Replies


P: n/a
Tool69 schrieb:
Hi,

Until now, I was running my own static site with Python, but I'm in
need of dynamism.

After reading some cgi tutorials, I saw Joe Gregorio's old article
"Why so many Python web frameworks?" about wsgi apps [http://
bitworking.org/news/Why_so_many_Python_web_frameworks] and have a
question about it. The code he gave works like a charm (I had to make
a little change because SQLAlchemy has changed since), but how the
hell can I serve static files (css, js, images, etc.) within an wsgi
app, ie inside a '/static' directory ?!
There is a wsgi-app out there that is called "static". Use that.

And it's the first hit on google "wsgi static"... :)

http://lukearno.com/projects/static/

Diez
Jun 27 '08 #2

P: n/a
kib schrieb:
Diez B. Roggisch a écrit :
>Tool69 schrieb:
>>Hi,

Until now, I was running my own static site with Python, but I'm in
need of dynamism.

After reading some cgi tutorials, I saw Joe Gregorio's old article
"Why so many Python web frameworks?" about wsgi apps [http://
bitworking.org/news/Why_so_many_Python_web_frameworks] and have a
question about it. The code he gave works like a charm (I had to make
a little change because SQLAlchemy has changed since), but how the
hell can I serve static files (css, js, images, etc.) within an wsgi
app, ie inside a '/static' directory ?!

There is a wsgi-app out there that is called "static". Use that.

And it's the first hit on google "wsgi static"... :)

http://lukearno.com/projects/static/

Diez

Hi Diez,

and thanks for yout help. In fact I already found it but never managed
to get it work because the static doc says :

from wsgiref.simple_server import make_server
import static
make_server('localhost', 9999, static.Cling('/var/www')).serve_forever()

and inside J.Gregorio's tutorial it is:

from wsgiref.simple_server import WSGIServer, WSGIRequestHandler
httpd = WSGIServer(('localhost', 8080), WSGIRequestHandler)
httpd.set_app(urls.urls)

It does not use 'make_server()' so how can I adapt it ?
static.Cling is a wsgi-app. The other code just makes a specific
wsgi-implementation based server out of it.

I finally managed to work with static files with a little hack, but it's
ugly because I'm reading each static file per request.
How else should that work? Apache does that the same way.

Diez
Jun 27 '08 #3

P: n/a
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

[ Diez B. Roggisch <de***@nospam.web.de]
>I finally managed to work with static files with a little hack, but it's
ugly because I'm reading each static file per request.

How else should that work? Apache does that the same way.
I guess, Apache does some kind of memory caching for files, which are often
requested and small enough to fit into the system memory. May be, that's
what the OP is referring to ...

- --
Freedom is always the freedom of dissenters.
(Rosa Luxemburg)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAkg4a1QACgkQn3IEGILecb5ibACgoYyLaOc+q5 1D0g+SuudnqHab
dYYAnjH3E0/e2y0owJ1PuWMk13i9YVA/
=7C8x
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Jun 27 '08 #4

P: n/a
I guess, Apache does some kind of memory caching for files, which are often
requested and small enough to fit into the system memory.
Are you sure about this? I could not find anything in the documentation
(other than mod_cache and friends, which is an unrelated functionality).
Also, I don't see the need for Apache to cache frequently requested
files itself. Instead, the operating system will cache frequently
requested directories and files in memory, and it will do the same for
a Python web server.

Regards,
Martin
Jun 27 '08 #5

P: n/a
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

[ "Martin v. Löwis" <ma****@v.loewis.de]
>I guess, Apache does some kind of memory caching for files, which are
often requested and small enough to fit into the system memory.

Are you sure about this?
No, I'm not. That's why I said "I guess" ;)
Also, I don't see the need for Apache to cache frequently requested
files itself. Instead, the operating system will cache frequently
requested directories and files in memory, and it will do the same for
a Python web server.
Of course, a modern OS kernel will perform caching anyway, but this is most
likely slower than in-process caching, since it will still require context
switches from userspace into kernel space.

Considering this, it seems reasonable to me, that apache does memory
caching, but I'm by far not sure, I wouldn't put a bet on this ;)

- --
Freedom is always the freedom of dissenters.
(Rosa Luxemburg)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAkg5K7kACgkQn3IEGILecb48VwCeJYqoyi7IJK wASza9/u381dmg
PqMAn1M/JBe8xEsOAPNosNWA9WoKCvNh
=K3tE
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Jun 27 '08 #6

P: n/a
Sebastian 'lunar' Wiesner schrieb:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

[ Diez B. Roggisch <de***@nospam.web.de]
>>I finally managed to work with static files with a little hack, but it's
ugly because I'm reading each static file per request.
How else should that work? Apache does that the same way.

I guess, Apache does some kind of memory caching for files, which are often
requested and small enough to fit into the system memory. May be, that's
what the OP is referring to ...
I'm not aware of that, and I even more seriously doubt it. Because
caching is a complicated, domain-dependend subject that would
*immediately* cry for configuration - e.g. caching strategies and such.

And a common idiom for apache & caching is to use Squid as reverse
proxy. Which wouldn't be the case would apache cache by itself.

Diez
Jun 27 '08 #7

P: n/a
Diez B. Roggisch <de***@nospam.web.dewrote:
>Sebastian 'lunar' Wiesner schrieb:
>I guess, Apache does some kind of memory caching for files, which are often
requested and small enough to fit into the system memory. May be, that's
what the OP is referring to ...
I'm not aware of that, and I even more seriously doubt it. Because
caching is a complicated, domain-dependend subject that would
*immediately* cry for configuration - e.g. caching strategies and such.
This is available in current apache with mod_file_cache (for an
explicitly configured list of files). I think the circumstances where
you'd want to use it are quite rare.

-M-
Jun 27 '08 #8

P: n/a
Matthew Woodcraft schrieb:
Diez B. Roggisch <de***@nospam.web.dewrote:
>Sebastian 'lunar' Wiesner schrieb:
>>I guess, Apache does some kind of memory caching for files, which are often
requested and small enough to fit into the system memory. May be, that's
what the OP is referring to ...
>I'm not aware of that, and I even more seriously doubt it. Because
caching is a complicated, domain-dependend subject that would
*immediately* cry for configuration - e.g. caching strategies and such.

This is available in current apache with mod_file_cache (for an
explicitly configured list of files). I think the circumstances where
you'd want to use it are quite rare.
As I said - explicit configuration is needed. And of course apache &
it's module system are flexible enough to allow caching as add-on. But
Sebastian speculated about some behind the scenes automatic caching.
Which apparently isn't there.

Diez
Jun 27 '08 #9

P: n/a
>>I guess, Apache does some kind of memory caching for files, which are often
>>requested and small enough to fit into the system memory. May be, that's
what the OP is referring to ...
>I'm not aware of that, and I even more seriously doubt it. Because
caching is a complicated, domain-dependend subject that would
*immediately* cry for configuration - e.g. caching strategies and such.

This is available in current apache with mod_file_cache (for an
explicitly configured list of files). I think the circumstances where
you'd want to use it are quite rare.
Interestingly enough, this *doesn't* do memory caching for files.
Instead, it either keeps the file handle open, so you can seek to the
beginning of the file on the next request (avoiding the directory
lookup), or you can mmap the file. However, even if you mmap the file,
it is still the operating system's choice whether or not to cache the
file contents in memory.

Regards,
Martin
Jun 27 '08 #10

This discussion thread is closed

Replies have been disabled for this discussion.